DOCSLIB.ORG

SLAVERY, FEAR, and DISUNION in the LONE STAR STATE TEXANS' ATTITUDES TOWARD SECESSION and the UNION, 1846-1861 APPROVED: Graduat

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SLAVERY, FEAR, and DISUNION in the LONE STAR STATE TEXANS' ATTITUDES TOWARD SECESSION and the UNION, 1846-1861 APPROVED: Graduat SLAVERY, FEAR, AND DISUNION IN THE LONE STAR STATE TEXANS' ATTITUDES TOWARD SECESSION AND THE UNION, 1846-1861 APPROVED: Graduate Committee: rofessor Minor Professor Committee/Member r. A. Committee Member Chai the Department^History Dean of Vhe Graduate School Ledbetter, Billy D., Slavery, Fear, and Disunion in the Lone Star State: Texans' Attitudes toward Secession and the Union, 1846-1861. Doctor of Philosophy (History), August, 1972. 315 pp., 4 figures, appendix, bibliography, 388 titles. This work is a study of white Texans' attitudes toward their role in the federal Union and their right to secede from it during the antebellum period. The central question of the study is why did people so strongly Unionist in 1846 became so strongly secessionist by 1861. In tracing this significant shift in Texans' sentiment, the author especially emphasizes the racial attitudes of white Texans, their emotional defense of the institution of slavery, and their strong conviction that the Negroes, if emancipated, would destroy white society. Of special importance to this study is the relationship of Texans' racial attitudes to their attitudes toward the Union. Since few secondary sources are available for this period of Texas history, research was done almost entirely in primary sources. Of utmost importance to the work were Texas newspapers. While having some influence on public opinion, the papers generally tended to reflect, rather than formulate, Texans' attitudes. Personal papers, especially letters, were also valuable in this undertaking. Papers of numerous individuals of the period are available at the University of Texas Library, in the Texas State Library at Austin, and in the Rosenberg Library in Galveston. Official sources such as Gammel, Laws of Texas, and the Texas state House and Senate Journals were also extremely important. Secondary sources, such as articles from the Southwestern Historical Quarterly and other journals and monographs concerning various aspects of Civil War and Texas history, were used when available to supplement the primary materials. Essentially this study is organized chronologically, with the exception of the opening discussion of slavery and racial attitudes in general. To Texans, slavery was both a system of labor needed to develop the state's natural resources and a system of race control essential to racial harmony. When annexation occurred in 1846, Texans believed that their institution was secure, but soon the House passed the Wilmot Proviso, which Texans regarded as a direct attack on slavery. Although defending secession, Texans still believed their interests would be protected in the Union, as their willing acceptance of the 1850 compromise indicated. Then in 1854 the Kansas-Nebraska Act stimulated the formation of the Republican party, dedicated to stopping slavery's growth. In response, Texans formed a strong state rights Democratic party, which in 1857 elected Hardin Runnels, an ultra state rightist, governor. But as a conservative reaction to his policies developed, Texans elected Unionist Sam Houston governor in 1859. This conservative mood of the state changed rapidly during the election of 1860, especially with the outbreak of slave insurrections in that year. When Lincoln was elected,several prominent citizens, circumventing Sam Houston, called a state convention, which promptly adopted an ordinance of secession. Texans' determination to preserve slavery as a system of labor and a means of race control caused them to become a part of the disastrous secession movement. As long as slavery was secure» they wanted to remain a part of the Union, but they were convinced that Lincoln and his party intended !>• to destroy the institution, upsetting the racial and social structure of the entire South. The result would, they believed, be race war and ultimately elevation of the Negro to a position of equality; most Texans preferred civil war to these developments. SLAVERY, FEAR, AND DISUNION IN THE LONE STAR STATE; TEXANS1 ATTITUDES TOWARD SECESSION AND THE UNION, 1846-1861 DISSERTATION Presented to the Graduate Council of the North Texas State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Billy D. Ledbetter, M. S, Denton, Texas August, 19 72 Copyright by Billy D. Ledbetter 1972 111 PREFACE On February 19, 1846, state-wide celebrations were the order of the day as the Republic of Texas enthusiastically tied its destiny to that of the United States. Fifteen years later, on March 2, 1861, Texans"^" were again celebrating, but this time the occasion was their cutting of the bonds that had held them to the Union. During the decade and a half between annexation and secession, the state prospered at a rate the people had never thought possible under the uncertain government of the Republic. The population--both slave and free --increased at an unprecedented rate, while Texans produced more goods, especially cotton, than ever before; and the Lone Star state seemed well on its way to becoming the "Empire State of the Union" that its leaders envisioned. In spite of the widespread prosperity, Texans1 sentiment toward the Union underwent drastic changes during this period; whereas 94 per cent of the votes cast in the annexation referendum favored statehood, in 1861, 76 per cent of the ballots cast favored dissolution of the Union. This study is an examination of Texans' attitudes toward the Union ^"Throughout this study the term Texan refers to the white Texan--the accepted ante-bellum meaning of the word. iv and the institution of slavery and an attempt to determine why a people so strongly Unionist in 1846 had become so strongly secessionist by 1861. Why did the people decide with such certainty to separate from a nation that had furthered their interests so successfully? Texans became disunionists only when they believed that the election of a Black Republican to the Presidency immediately threatened the existence of slavery. They respected the Union and until Lincoln's election felt that their interests were best served within it, but the perpetuation of slavery was far more important to Texans than any abstract principles of nationalism. Slavery was an essential part of Texas' social structure, a means of controlling the Negro race and establishing social order, as well as working the land'. Their belief that the Negro was naturally inferior, and that slavery was the only means of controlling his animalistic nature caused Texans to fear that emancipation would lead to racial warfare, with the Negroes committing all manner of depredations against the whites. Texans, heavily armed with their concepts of state rights, refused to tolerate the election of a Republi- can President because in their minds his party intended to destroy the social structure of the South, by destroying its v peculiar institution. Thus Texans' racial attitudes became the most significant factor in explaining secession sentiment in the state. VI TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS vii Chapter I. WHITE OVER BLACK 1 II. UNION AND THE ROOTS OF DISUNION 36 III. CONTROVERSY AND COMPROMISE 64 IV. POLITICS AND PARTIES, 1854-1856 92 V. EXTREMISM AND REACTION, 1857-1859 121 VI. THE MOUNTING FEAR 150 VII. THE CRISIS 180 VIII. SECESSION ACHIEVED. 225 APPENDIX 277 BIBLIOGRAPHY 287 vix LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1. Population by County, 1860 7 2. Slave Distribution, 1860 8 3. Gubernatorial Elections, 1857, 1859. .... 145 4. Vote on Secession Referendum, 1861 275 VI 11 CHAPTER I WHITE OVER BLACK Long before Anglo-American migration to Texas began in the early 1820's, southerners had been developing an elaborate set of myths, ideas, and rules to justify and control the institution of Negro slavery. Unquestioned ideas of the inferiority of the Negro, of his suitability for slavery, and of the need for slavery to develop southern resources--these and many other notions were universally accepted. Migrants to Texas, being primarily from the southern states, brought these ideas to the new frontier and further developed them. Acquiring the necessary labor to develop the vast stretches of undeveloped cotton lands meant bringing a large number of blacks into the state, and Texans believed that the only means of controlling them and preventing racial strife was the institution of slavery. Considering any agitation against the institution as a threat to their civilization, Texans were convinced that free Negroes could not function in white society, and more important, that white society could not function with free Negroes in it. The agitation to end slavery was older than the Union when Texas became the twenty-eighth state in 1846, but in the decade and a half prior to annexation it gained momentum in the North. Only six months after Texas joined the Union, the Wilmot Proviso was introduced, and its passage by the House of Representatives indicated that a majority of the people in the North opposed further expansion of slavery into the territories. With the introduction of the Proviso issue, slavery was catapulted ahead of every other issue in national politics, a position it retained until the South seceded from the Union. The key to understanding the seces- sion movement in Texas lies in understanding the institution of slavery as it existed during the critical years 1846-1861 and in understanding Texans' attitudes toward slavery and the Negro race. Texans' racial attitudes, coupled with the dependence of their social and economic structure upon slavery, meant that they could not tolerate antislavery agitation. Immigrants to Texas established the institution of slavery because they believed that it was the best and fastest means of developing their resources, the same reasoning that other southerners had used in adopting it.1 However, in "'"Kenneth M. Stampp, The Peculiar Institution: Slavery in the Ante-Bellum South (New York: Vintage Books, 1956), pp. 5-6, making this choice Texans were unique in that they adopted slavery at a time when most of the civilized world, including the northern states, was severely criticizing it.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • San Jacinto Battleground and State Historical Park: a Historical Synthesis and Archaeological Management Plan
    Volume 2002 Article 3 2002 San Jacinto Battleground and State Historical Park: A Historical Synthesis and Archaeological Management Plan I. Waynne Cox Steve A. Tomka Raba Kistner, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita Part of the American Material Culture Commons, Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Environmental Studies Commons, Other American Studies Commons, Other Arts and Humanities Commons, Other History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons, and the United States History Commons Tell us how this article helped you. Cite this Record Cox, I. Waynne and Tomka, Steve A. (2002) "San Jacinto Battleground and State Historical Park: A Historical Synthesis and Archaeological Management Plan," Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: Vol. 2002, Article 3. https://doi.org/10.21112/ita.2002.1.3 ISSN: 2475-9333 Available at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol2002/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for Regional Heritage Research at SFA ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State by an authorized editor of SFA ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. San Jacinto Battleground and State Historical Park: A Historical Synthesis and Archaeological Management Plan Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License This article is available in Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol2002/iss1/3 San Jacinto Battleground State Historical Park A Historical Synthesis and Archaeological Management Plan by I.
    [Show full text]
  • Wright, Louise Wigfall. a Southern Girl in '61: the War-Time Memories
    Wright, Louise Wigfall. A Southern Girl in ’61: The War-time Memories. Gansevoort, N.Y.: Corner House Historical Publications, 2000. John C. Breckinridge, 27-29 Jefferson Davis, 29 Robert M. T. Hunter, 30 Louis Wigfall, 30-32 Zachariah Chandler, 32-33 Wigfall and secession, Andrew Johnson, 33-34 Charleston and Fort Sumter, Beauregard 34-46 Montgomery, morale, 49ff Varina Davis, Mary Chesnut, Jefferson Davis, 50 Fort Sumter, 50 Hatred for Davis in the North, 51-52 Northern resources and courage, northerners will fight, 53 Richmond, 54ff Jefferson Davis, 51 Bradley and Mrs. Johnson, Marylanders, underwear for troops, 56-57 Northern reaction to Sumter, 57-58 Babcocks, 59, 61 Mary Lincoln, 59 Republican newspapers, 61 Wild tales in the north, 61-62 Passing through the Federal lines to Richmond, 62-67 Beauregard, Manassas, 71-74 Winfield Scott, 73-74 Richmond economy, society, Cary sisters, 76 Captain Latané, 78-80 Joseph Johnston, 80 Seven Days, 81 Mary Chesnut, 83-84 Jefferson Davis and Wigfall, 87ff General Holmes, 88-89 Longstreet, 89-90 Joseph Johnston, 90 Prices, soap, 91 Prince Polignac, 92-93 Robert E. Lee and Texas soldiers, Hood, 94-95 Jeb Stuart, 95 Johnston, 96-97 Fredericksburg, 97-98, 103 Johnston, Chattanooga, Bragg, Davis, 98-100 Seddon, Bragg, Johnston, local defense, Oldham, 101-108 Richmond, food, 112 Items for a box, 113 Hood’s minstrels, Christmas, 116 Parties, clothing, 117 Hetty Cary, 119 Johnston, conscription, Bragg, Pemberton, Davis, 121-125 Death of Stonewall Jackson, 126-27 Richmond prices, 129 Chancellorsville,
    [Show full text]
  • Ware, Alexander Caldwell, Andrew Landers, Levi Watts, William Caldwell, Robert W
    Then There Was The Adventure The Story of Alexander Ware 1789-1836 Edward J. Lanham Then There Was The Adventure The Story of Alexander Ware 1789-1836 Introduction “The story of America is of settlers following the sun westward to new opportunities.” Georgia---Mid April, 2013 As spring drifted into summer along the Flint River, the landscape exploded across the Southland into a wreath of greenery. My field research, which I nick-named “GPS- in-hand and boots-on- the-ground”, is on hold until the leaves turn in the fall. It is now time to compile the past 6 months of research and exploration. For the past 24 years, I have lived in a small town in Fayette County, Georgia which was established in 1823 along the famous Indian trail named the “McIntosh Road.” While researching the history and route of this major trail, I eventually, as a past time, devoted 15 years to mapping that trail and others, then overlaying them on to current day topographical and road maps. I learned that the McIntosh Road was named for the Creek Indian Chief, William McIntosh, who widened a segment of a much longer existing trading route into a wagon road. Chief William McIntosh, a half breed Scot-Creek Indian, was raised by his Creek mother. As a young man, he fought with Andrew Jackson and became a brigadier general. He even dined with President Thomas Jefferson at the White House. McIntosh became a wealthy business man and owned hundreds of acres in Georgia and Alabama. His rank of both chief and brigadier general earned him an association with five presidents: Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, James Madison, James Monroe and John Quincy Adams.
    [Show full text]
  • The Founding of Henderson and Rusk County
    The Founding of Henderson and Rusk County Henderson was created for the purpose of being the county seat of Rusk County. The area now known as Rusk County was originally part of Nacogdoches County. Settlement in the area began as early as 1832 with the establishment of Mount Enterprise, and in 1838, Captain W.A. Miller, from Georgia, settled near the present site of Henderson in a community then known as Gibsontown. After the defeat of the Cherokee Indians in the battle of the Neches, the population in the area boomed, and by 1842, had grown sufficiently to form its own county. On January 16, 1843, the Congress of the Republic of Texas enacted a bill creating Rusk County and decreeing that an election be held to select five commissioners to select a site for the county seat to be named 'Henderson.' The new county was named for Thomas Jefferson Rusk, Secretary of War for the Texas Republic, and elevated to the rank of General during the Texas Revolution. Rusk helped develop the court system in Texas during the Republic, and later became Texas Senator in the U.S. Congress. Henderson was named for J. Pinckney Henderson, the first Attorney General of the Republic of Texas and later Secretary of State and on to be the first Governor of the State in February 1846 President Sam Houston appointed him Ambassador to France and Great Britain. In the 1840s, he was a law partner of Thomas J. Rusk. He was elected the first Governor of the State of Texas in February 1846 and later was appointed to the United States Senate.
    [Show full text]
  • Decision at Fort Sumter
    -·-~• .}:}· ~- ·-.:: • r. • • i DECISION AT FORT SUMTER Prologue In 1846 Congressman JeffeLson Davis of Mississippi presented to the House of Representatives a resolution calling for the replace- ment of Federal troops in all coastal forts by state militia. The proposal died in committee and shortly thereafter Davis resigned from Congress to lead the red-shirted First Mississippi Rifles to war and (~~-ll glory in Mexico. Now it was the morning of April 10, 1861, and Davis was President of the newly proclaimed Confederate States of America. As he met with his cabinet in a Montgomery, Alabama hotel room he had good reason to regret the failure of that resolution of fifteen years ago. For had it passed, he would not have had to make the decision he was about to make: Order Brigadier General P. G. T. Beauregard, commander of Confederate forces at Charleston, South Carolina to demand the surrender of the Federal garrison on Fort Sumter in Charleston harbor. But before Davis made this decision, other men had made other decisions -- decisions which formed a trail leading to that Montgomery hotel room on the morning of April 10, 1861. The War Department'~cision In a sense the first of those decisions went back to 1829 when the War Department dumped tons of granite rubble brougi1t from New England on a c.andspit at the mouth of Charleston harbor. On the foundation so formed a fort named after the South Carolina r - 2 - Revolutionary War hero, Thomas Sumter, was built. However it was built very slowly, as Congress appropriated the needed money in driblets.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 12: the Lone Star Republic
    RepublicThe of Te x a s 1836–1845 Why It Matters As you study Unit 4, you will learn about Texas as a republic. After the creation of the United States from the original 13 colonies, other territories were granted statehood. Only Texas entered the union as a separate and independent nation. The distinctive nature of Texas owes much to its having been a republic before it was a state and to the influence of its settlers. Primary Sources Library See pages 690–691 for primary source readings to accompany Unit 4. Going Visiting by Friedrich Richard Petri (c. 1853) from the Texas Memorial Museum, Austin, Texas. Socializing with neighbors was an important part of community life during the years of the republic. Not all Texas settlers wore buckskin and moccasins as this well-dressed family shows. 264 “Times here are easy… money plenty, the people much better satisfied.” —Dr. Ashbel Smith, December 22, 1837 GEOGRAPHY&HISTORY RICH HERITAGE There are many reasons why people take the big step of leaving their homes and moving to an unknown land— and Texas, during the years 1820 to 1860, witnessed all of them. The newly arriving immigrant groups tended to set- tle in one particular area, since it was easier to work with and live around people who spoke the same language and practiced the same customs. Many Mexicans came north while Texas was still a Spanish territory to set up farms on the fertile Coastal Plains. As A traditional band plays lively German the United States grew, more Native Americans, who had music at the Texas Folklife Festival.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidents Pro Tempore of the United States Senate Since 1789
    PRO TEM Presidents Pro Tempore of the United States Senate since 1789 4 OIL Presidents Pro Tempore of the United States Senate since 1789 With a preface by Senator Robert C. Byrd, President pro tempore Prepared by the Senate Historical Office under the direction of Nancy Erickson, Secretary of the Senate U. S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 110th Congress, 2d Session Senate Publication 110-18 U.S. Government Printing Office Washington: 2008 COPYRIGHTED MATERIALS Many of the photographs and images in this volume are protected by copyright. Those have been used here with the consent of their respective owners. No republication of copyrighted material may be made without permission in writing from the copyright holder. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data United States. Congress. Senate. Pro tern : presidents pro tempore of the United States Senate since 1789 / prepared by the Senate Historical Office ; under the direction of Nancy Erickson, Secretary of the Senate. p. cm. Includes index. ISBN 978-0-16-079984-6 1. United States. Congress. Senate--Presiding officers. 2. United States. Congress. Senate--History. I. Erickson, Nancy. II. United States. Congress. Senate. Historical Office. III. Title. JK1226.U55 2008 328.73092'2--dc22 2008004722 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402-0001 ISBN 978-0-16-079984-6 Table of Contents Foreword ................... ................... 3 20. Samuel Smith (MD), 1805-1807, 1808, 1828, 1829-1831 21. John Milledge (GA), 1809 ..................
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Woodrow Wilson James Madison* James Monroe* Edith
    FAMOUS MEMBERS OF THE JEFFERSON SOCIETY PRESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Thomas Woodrow Wilson James Madison∗ James Monroe∗ FIRST LADIES OF THE UNITED STATES Edith Bolling Galt Wilson∗ PRIME MINISTERS OF THE UNITED KINGDOM Margaret H. Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher∗ SPEAKERS OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Robert Mercer Taliaferro Hunter UNITED STATES SENATORS Oscar W. Underwood, Senate Minority Leader, Alabama Hugh Scott, Senate Minority Leader, Pennsylvania Robert Mercer Taliaferro Hunter, Virginia Willis P. Bocock, Virginia John S. Barbour Jr., Virginia Harry F. Byrd Jr., Virginia John Warwick Daniel, Virginia Claude A. Swanson, Virginia Charles J. Faulkner, West Virginia John Sharp Williams, Mississippi John W. Stevenson, Kentucky Robert Toombs, Georgia Clement C. Clay, Alabama Louis Wigfall, Texas Charles Allen Culberson, Texas William Cabell Bruce, Maryland Eugene J. McCarthy, Minnesota∗ James Monroe, Virginia∗ MEMBERS OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Oscar W. Underwood, House Majority Leader, Alabama John Sharp Williams, House Minority Leader, Mississippi Robert Mercer Taliaferro Hunter, Virginia Richard Parker, Virginia Robert A. Thompson, Virginia Thomas H. Bayly, Virginia Richard L. T. Beale, Virginia William Ballard Preston, Virginia John S. Caskie, Virginia Alexander H. H. Stuart, Virginia James Alexander Seddon, Virginia John Randolph Tucker, Virginia Roger A. Pryor, Virginia John Critcher, Virginia Colgate W. Darden, Virginia Claude A. Swanson, Virginia John S. Barbour Jr., Virginia William L. Wilson, West Virginia Wharton J. Green, North Carolina William Waters Boyce, South Carolina Hugh Scott, Pennsylvania Joseph Chappell Hutcheson, Texas John W. Stevenson, Kentucky Robert Toombs, Georgia Thomas W. Ligon, Maryland Augustus Maxwell, Florida William Henry Brockenbrough, Florida Eugene J.
    [Show full text]
  • John H. Reagan: Unionist Or Secessionist? Philip J
    East Texas Historical Journal Volume 13 | Issue 1 Article 7 3-1975 John H. Reagan: Unionist or Secessionist? Philip J. Avillo Jr Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ethj Part of the United States History Commons Tell us how this article helped you. Recommended Citation Avillo, Philip J. Jr (1975) "John H. Reagan: Unionist or Secessionist?," East Texas Historical Journal: Vol. 13: Iss. 1, Article 7. Available at: http://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ethj/vol13/iss1/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by SFA ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in East Texas Historical Journal by an authorized administrator of SFA ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EAST TEXAS HISTORICAL SOCIETY 23 JOHN H. REAGAN: UNIONIST OR SECESSIONIST? by Philip J. Avilla, Jr. Studies of Texas ... ecession have concluded that Texans voted overwhelmingly in favor ofwithdrawal from the Union in 1861. 1 Yet, students ofTexas during the Civil War era have also contended that strong signs of Unianis! sentiment existed in the state until the very eve of secession. For example, onc histmian has interpreted Sam Houston's strong victory in the Texas gubernatorial election in 1859 as clear testimony of this Union sentiment and the election of Andrew J. Hamilton to the United States House of Representatives from the western Texas district in that same year has been similarly interpreted. John H. Reagan, elected along with Hamilton to the House of Representatives, has also received recognition as a true Unionist in ante-bellum Texas.2 When Texas finally seceded, however, Houston's opposition proved less than forceful, Hamilton served in the newly elected Texas legislature, and Reagan withdrew from Congress before his state seceded.
    [Show full text]
  • Bowling Green Civil War Round Table Newsletter (April 2016) Manuscripts & Folklife Archives Western Kentucky University, [email protected]
    Western Kentucky University TopSCHOLAR® Bowling Green Civil War Round Table Newsletter History 4-2016 Bowling Green Civil War Round Table Newsletter (April 2016) Manuscripts & Folklife Archives Western Kentucky University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/civil_war Part of the Military History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Folklife Archives, Manuscripts &, "Bowling Green Civil War Round Table Newsletter (April 2016)" (2016). Bowling Green Civil War Round Table Newsletter. Paper 12. https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/civil_war/12 This Newsletter is brought to you for free and open access by TopSCHOLAR®. It has been accepted for inclusion in Bowling Green Civil War Round Table Newsletter by an authorized administrator of TopSCHOLAR®. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 1 Founded March 2011 – Bowling Green, Kentucky President –Tom Carr; Vice President - Jonathan Jeffrey; Secretary – Carol Crowe-Carraco; Treasurer – Robert Dietle; Newsletter: Tom Burden Advisors – Glenn LaFantasie and - Greg Biggs (Program Chair and President-Clarksville CWRT) The Bowling Green, KY Civil War Round Table meets on the 3rd Tuesday of each month (except June, July, and December). Email: [email protected] We meet at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, April 19th in Cherry Hall 227 on the Campus of Western Kentucky University. PLEASE NOTE ROOM CHANGE Our meetings are always open to the public. Members please bring a friend or two – new recruits are always welcome. Our Program for April 2016: The Bowling Green Civil War Roundtable is pleased to have Mr. Tom Parson as our guest speaker this month. During the summer of 1864 a Union column, commanded by Maj.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking the Federal Eminent Domain Power
    University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound Journal Articles Faculty Scholarship 2013 Rethinking the Federal Eminent Domain Power William Baude Follow this and additional works at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/journal_articles Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation William Baude, "Rethinking the Federal Eminent Domain Power," 122 Yale Law Journal 1738 (2013). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 1738.BAUDE.1825_UPDATED.DOC 5/18/2013 4:48:48 PM William Baude Rethinking the Federal Eminent Domain Power abstract. It is black-letter law that the federal government has the power to take land through eminent domain. This modern understanding, however, is a complete departure from the Constitution’s historical meaning. From the Founding until the Civil War, the federal government was thought to have an eminent domain power only within the District of Columbia and the territories—but not within states. Politicians and judges (including in two Supreme Court decisions) repeatedly denied the existence of such a power, and when the federal government did need to take land, it relied on state cooperation to do so. People during this period refused to infer a federal eminent domain power from Congress’s enumerated powers or the Necessary and Proper Clause because they viewed it as a “great power”—one that was too important to be left to implication. And they refused to infer it from the Takings Clause either, because the Clause was not intended to expand Congress's power beyond the District and territories.
    [Show full text]
  • The Archaeology, Bioarchaeology, Ethnography, Ethnohistory, and History Bibliography of the Caddo Indian Peoples of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas
    Volume 2021 Article 1 2021 The Archaeology, Bioarchaeology, Ethnography, Ethnohistory, and History Bibliography of the Caddo Indian Peoples of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas Timothy K. Perttula None Duncan McKinnon Scott Hammerstedt University of Oklahoma Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita Part of the American Material Culture Commons, Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Environmental Studies Commons, Other American Studies Commons, Other Arts and Humanities Commons, Other History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons, and the United States History Commons Tell us how this article helped you. Cite this Record Perttula, Timothy K.; McKinnon, Duncan; and Hammerstedt, Scott (2021) "The Archaeology, Bioarchaeology, Ethnography, Ethnohistory, and History Bibliography of the Caddo Indian Peoples of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas," Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: Vol. 2021, Article 1. ISSN: 2475-9333 Available at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol2021/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for Regional Heritage Research at SFA ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State by an authorized editor of SFA ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Archaeology, Bioarchaeology, Ethnography, Ethnohistory, and History Bibliography of the Caddo Indian Peoples of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. This article is available in Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol2021/iss1/1 1 The Archaeology, Bioarchaeology, Ethnography, Ethnohistory, and History Bibliography of the Caddo Indian Peoples of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas Compiled by Timothy K.
    [Show full text]